In re Din Dorothy Emma N.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Din Dorothy Emma N.

265 A.D.2d 218, 696 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10490

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 19, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D.2d 218 (In re Din Dorothy Emma N.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Din Dorothy Emma N., 265 A.D.2d 218, 696 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10490 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Bruce Kaplan, J.), entered on or about July 30, 1997, which, to the extent appealed from, upon a finding of abandonment, terminated the parental rights of respondent father and committed custody and guardianship of the subject children to the Commissioner of Social Services and petitioner agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We decline to disturb the Family Court’s findings, based largely on its assessment of witness credibility, that respondent father failed to stay in contact with his children during the relevant statutory period, and that he was not discouraged or prevented from doing so (see, Matter of Shalena Lee C., 197 AD2d 404). Also adequately supported in the record was Family Court’s ensuing dispositional determination that it was in the children’s best interests to terminate their father’s parental rights so as to free them for adoption (see, Family Ct Act § 631; Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 147-148). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Bruce Kaplan, J.), entered on or about July 30, 1997, which, to the extent appealed from, upon a finding of abandonment, terminated the parental rights of respondent father and committed custody and guardianship of the subject children to the Commissioner of Social Services and petitioner agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We decline to disturb the Family Court’s findings, based largely on its assessment of witness credibility, that respondent father failed to stay in contact with his children during the relevant statutory period, and that he was not discouraged or prevented from doing so (see, Matter of Shalena Lee C., 197 AD2d 404). Also adequately supported in the record was Family Court’s ensuing dispositional determination that it was in the children’s best interests to terminate their father’s parental rights so as to free them for adoption (see, Family Ct Act § 631; Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 147-148). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 218, 696 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10490, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-din-dorothy-emma-n-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack